Mount Olive police shoot 'vicious' dog - Your opinion?

Tell us what you think
Forum rules
The Goldsboro News-Argus reserves the right to delete any posts deemed inappropriate or off-topic.

Re: Mount Olive police shoot 'vicious' dog - Your opinion?

Postby Former Goldsboro on Wed Oct 01, 2008 11:47 am

Also being a member of the Humane Society does not affect ones ability to write or publish an impartial story. That is like saying a writer of the Baptish faith could not objectively report a story regarding people of the Methodist Faith, you are grabbing at straws to prove your point.
Former Goldsboro
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:41 pm

Re: Mount Olive police shoot 'vicious' dog - Your opinion?

Postby gotsomesense on Wed Oct 01, 2008 12:50 pm

Former Goldsboro

The eye witnesses who were there the entire time - the caller and Lynn Joyner - are the eye witnesses that I trust the most. Notice that none of the news articles have any quotes from Pam King, I wonder why? WRAL did interviews with neighbors who supported that the dog had shown vicious tendencies, chased them and their children, growled, shown teeth, and approached them with fur raised. Guess what???? None of these interviews were shown on WRAL. Very, very little of these interviews were put in the News-Argus. But these people were interviewed and because the media didn't like what they had to say, their eye witness accounts were either minimized, such as Bobby Jean Dixon's voice over and 3 seconds of air time, or they were NOT INCLUDED AT ALL. You know why? Because their viewpoint did not try to sensationalize the story or blame the officer and their viewpoint wouldn't sell papers or keep people writing on the WRAL BOLO. The MOTribune was the only media outlet that did not write a one-sided sensationalized story. The editor stated that he would rather shut the paper down, than write a biased story as an article. Whenever I see one-sided coverage, my critical thinking skills kick in and I dig a little deeper. Since I do have family and friends that LIVE on this street and my son is frequently a guest in the Wiggins home, I got the story from people who WERE there the ENTIRE time and people who have been terrorized repeatedly by this dog for the last ten months. Not the ones who didn't walk out of their house until AFTER they heard a gunshot, or the ones who came out seconds before the shots were fired and were talking on the telephone at the time. Really, someone who saw the whole thing from start to finish is in the best position to judge what happened. Since Ms. Joyner has repeatedly spoken out in support of the officer and all his efforts to get the dog under control, and I happen to have personally known her since I went to school at MOC with her daughter in 1999, and I know that she is a fine upstanding citizen and not a liar, then yes, I believe her account 100%.

And by the way, for those who think that animal control never has to put down a dog for viciousness, because they are so highly trained to deal with these situations, guess what? They shot and killed a dog near Indian Springs just this morning. This dog had not bitten any person at all. It had been terrorizing a man's goats. If you don't believe me - call them and ask them yourself. Isn't it amazing that it's OK to kill a dog for bothering goats, but it's not OK if there are people involved. Imagine?
gotsomesense
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 11:12 pm

Re: Mount Olive police shoot 'vicious' dog - Your opinion?

Postby Former Goldsboro on Wed Oct 01, 2008 1:46 pm

There is a big difference between have attacked and have potential to attack. All dogs have potential to attack so if you going to put them down for that, take your dog outside and shot it now, because it may attack in the future. The dog in question this morning had attacked the goats, when a dog attacks another creature unprovoked it is a strong indication that it will attack humans. I do not blame the animal control people for shoting a dog with blood on it's mouth, I would have done the same. Durham did not have anyone's or anything's blood on his face. Durham was simply a nuisance I will not argue that point, he was not at home, he was out bothering other people and wanting to play with people that did not want to play with him. My dobie will bark and growl when playing, he will also raise the hair on his back when actively involved in play, he will put his mouth on your hands and arms but will not bite down, it is all in the name of play. Everyone, even Lynn Joyner says Durham was chasing and barking and growling, he never even attempted to bite and trust me if Durham had wanted to catch one of these people running to the house for shelter, he would have. Dogs can out run adults and children, so if he wanted to catch and attack he would have, he was wanting to play, he was bored. I am sure everything went down exactly as Lynn said it did, her viewpoint is her view point, the others saw it a different way. I see from your last posts that you are friends with the Wiggins, it is only natural you would want to take thier side, you may be the one suffering from a deplorable lack of objectivity not the News Argus. Also the last time I checked the Police Chief works for the mayor and the Mayor has spoken out against the way this was handled. This story is not particularly sensational. MOTribune used a politically correct stance not to print anything regarding the story so as not to have to be involved in anything controversial, typical of small town editors, only printing thier own point of view, and I would definately call that suppression with lack of objectivity. When I consider the eyewitness accounts, I actually get tickled thinking about little ole Mt. Olive ladies in thier aprons running ( and I know some of these women and children are a little, shall we say chubby) from a dog and creating mass hysteria in the process, and calling 911 to save them from a dog that wanted to play, the laughter ends there.
Former Goldsboro
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:41 pm

Re: Mount Olive police shoot 'vicious' dog - Your opinion?

Postby gotsomesense on Wed Oct 01, 2008 3:23 pm

Former Goldsboro

First off, I didn't say the MOTribune left out anything - just my point, they included EVERYBODY's account and viewpoint and gave equal space and consideration to each party. That is what being unbiased and impartial means. It is a stark contrast to the coverage of the NewsArgus and WRAL.

Second, if you don't call a three year old who is pinned to the ground being attacked - I'm not sure what would constitute being attacked. Do you think that the only way a dog can cause injury to someone is to actually put their teeth into the skin? The very act of a dog knocking down and pinning a three year old to the ground can certainly cause injury. So in my opinion this dog has "attacked" before. If you were the mother of the three year old you might feel the same way. It really is too late after there is blood on the dog's mouth - which is what you say is the difference in the incidences between Durham and the dog that was attacking the goats - whether it is a goat, a child, or a police officer involved, by the time there is blood on the dog's mouth, it's way too late.

My whole point is this: the majority of the news media ignored, and continues to ignore, those who saw the whole thing and still supported the police officer. (Don't you find it ironic that ALL the people who witnessed the WHOLE event have publicly supported the officer.) Instead the media relied on and gave the most space and coverage to other people, who either saw NONE of the incident, as in the lady that WRAL featured who came out of her house after the shots were fired, or people who saw only the very end of the incidence. Or the owner, who wasn't even home and just "knows" that her dog would "never" do any of the things that multiple neighbors testify to. (That reminds me of people who say there children would "never" do such and suchReally, who is the more credible witness - someone who saw everything or only a portion or absolutely nothing? Of course, most people would listen to the person who witnessed everything, but instead the media focuses on those who saw nothing, only part of the incident, or weren't even home. PLEASE, think logically. I was hearing at the Sunday dinner table months ago about this dog and how he was chasing adults and children and behaving viciously . These stories have not come about just since the dog was shot. These stories were made public in support of the police officer who was being hung out to dry by the biased media. Please tell me why people would make up lies about a poor "puppy"? And by the way, puppies become dogs at 9 months old. Durham was two years old. Please stop calling him a puppy. He had not been a puppy for quite a while.

There have been vet techs who posted on this site and on WRAL who stated that labs are different dogs when their owners are around and that some of the worst biting cases have come from labs. These people are "experts" at dog behavior and they were also handily dismissed by people in the general who "know" that labs would "never" do anything like this. The people who are totally against the officer have shown a continuous pattern of dismissing experts and eye witnesses. They also don't want to talk about the owner still not fixing the dog pen for the Rottweiler.

And Former Goldsboro, later, in the MOTribune, the mayor admitted to reacting half-cocked to people who had called him at home, after hours, before he had heard the entire story. The callers, of course, did not give him the entire story. Notice that he is now not calling for the dismissal of the officer, nor any discipline against him whatsoever. He was put on PAID administrative leave, which is procedure when a firearm is discharged, and he is now back on the streets. The mayor is calling for changes to be made in the disposal of animals that have to be put down. The officer followed the procedure that was in place at the time of the incident. He was following the direct orders of his senior officer, who was also following the procedure. He is not authorized to change any procedure because he thinks it's not right. That is an administrative decision that he did not then and does not now have the authority to make. Please get an unbiased source and quote it if you want to talk about the Mayor. If you'll notice, the NewsArgus has quit publishing any articles on the incident because the majority of the folks who live in Mount Olive have gotten all the facts now and agree that they would have done the same thing given the situation. The Tribune has continued to publish articles that have stated the Mayor's change of heart after getting all the facts. Please, the fact that the officer is back on the street with no reprimand whatsoever is proof that the mayor is not still calling for the officer's head on a platter. Here is a quote from their last story:


"Police: Dog was a threat to neighborhood
By William Holloman, staff writer

The dog that was shot and killed last week by a Mount Olive Police officer
was and had been a threat to the neighborhood.

That was the conclusion by result of a departmental investigation that
focused on interviews with citizens living in the neighborhood where
the “unfortunate” incident occurred on Thursday of last week.

Now that the smoke that created an uproar of before the fact
conclusions has resulted in a more rational conclusion."

Notice that they focused on interviews with citizens living in the neighborhood.

Also, the 25 - 30 yards that has been reported is incorrect. Eyewitnesses said: "the dog was then shot as it approached the officers and got within 10 or 12 feet." That is roughly 3 - 4 yards. A big difference. Even the neighbor who came out just before the dog was shot and says that she asked the officer not to shoot the dog has not disputed how close the dog was to the officers.

Everyone, please look at all the facts.
gotsomesense
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 11:12 pm

Re: Mount Olive police shoot 'vicious' dog - Your opinion?

Postby Former Goldsboro on Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:41 pm

What you are really saying is take my opinion as fact, opinions are like rear ends everyone has one and they all stink. Once again you state all of Mt. O is agreeing with you, wrong. I have not spoken with a single person in Mt. O that agrees with your opinion, makes me wonder who you really are, maybe the officer or a family member. Remember, I do not live there but I know many, many people in the southern part of the county. People are entitled to their opinion you included, all of your so called facts are not changing my mind or anyone else on this board. When the dog pinned the little boy down, did he lick him and play with, trust me if he wanted to bite him or if he was a biter that was the perfect time to bite. Dogs are considered puppies until they are 3 years old, puppies play, my dobe would pin me down if I would let him, but I know better than to let him be dominant. All the pup was doing with the little boy was being dominant, he did not hurt the child. My older son when he was younger would let our dog pin him down and giggle the whole time, it is called playing. You try running from your dog and see if he gives chase, he will and he will let you win, it is more fun that way.
Former Goldsboro
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:41 pm

Re: Mount Olive police shoot 'vicious' dog - Your opinion?

Postby scooter424 on Thu Oct 02, 2008 9:49 am

well if it is true that the dog has pinned down a three year old child, that means that you are just as guilty as the officer for not calling animal control before now!!! the being called 4 times in 2 years to this dog is real hard to believe considering that he was a 2 year old dog. does this mean that a puppy is a viciuos dog that everyone is scared of???
scooter424
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Mount Olive police shoot 'vicious' dog - Your opinion?

Postby gotsomesense on Thu Oct 02, 2008 10:58 am

Scooter

The child didn't belong to me. The parents of the child talked to the father of the dog owner, who by his own admission, promised to put up a higher fence but never did. Check out his own post on this forum if you doubt me. And the Encarta, Merriam-Webster, and Cambridge dictionaries define a puppy as a dog under the age of one. I got the nine moths from a vet tech who stated that generally puppies are considered to have reached their full growth by nine months and are then considered to be dogs. I guess Webster and the crew are wrong too, huh?
gotsomesense
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 11:12 pm

Re: Mount Olive police shoot 'vicious' dog - Your opinion?

Postby gotsomesense on Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:20 pm

Former Goldsboro,

I have NEVER stated that EVERYBODY in Mount Olive agreed with me, but the people who were the most affected by this situation do - please read on to the bottom.

You can certainly have your opinion about what your dog will probably do or might do where it concerns your family's safety. Don't try to push your opinion on me or the officer who was being accosted and the other neighbors who had been being accosted by this dog for the last year. More neighbors from another neighborhood across Main Street have expressed their appreciation that something was finally done about this dog because they were being chased, growled at, etc. in their yards too. You are an animal lover and you evidently like this type of behavior - by all means tolerate it if you'd like, from your dog and anybody else's who decides to come to your yard if that's why YOU want. Everybody does not feel this way and people have the RIGHT to be free from any kind of aggression from somebody else's dog. They do not have to put up with dogs that jump on them or their children or otherwise threaten them or their family. An officer also does not have to wait and see if a dog is going to bite them when that dog has already lunged towards them, chased them and the complainant into the house and continues to show signs of aggression and is moving rapidly toward them. Sorry, if you want to put up with it then fine, but don't obligate others to. The law certainly does not obligate them to now and did not then. (see below) Wiggins had a dobe, Truman, for several years before he had children. He gave the dog away because dobes, Truman included, are known for being very alert, high-strung and extremely active. He did not want this around his young children and so he made this choice. He certainly shouldn't have to put up with anybody else's dog when he made this prudent choice to find another home for his dog. This is what being a responsible parent and dog owner is about. Oh, and the reason the dog didn't get a chance to bite or otherwise harm the child was probably because of the broom stick that the dog was being whacked with. It was after this incident that the father of the dog owner promised to put up a higher fence, but never did, by his own admission on this forum. Check back and see if you feel the need.

Oh, and the outraged mayor you speak of, well he, the Town Manager, the Town Board, and the administrators in the MOPD had a meeting and reviewed signed testimonies from ALL of the neighbors. Guess what? A complaint about an animal is now considered CRIMINAL on the first offense. They are required to issue a written warning the first time they have to go to an owner about their animal now. On the second complaint the pet owner is issued a citation, and a fine I believe. The third time animal control will come and remove the animal from the owner. This is regardless of what the complaint is, whether it be roaming, attacking, or just barking excessively. This is a town and they have laws against all of the above. Animal control must also be called for EVERY animal call. (I notice showin' teeth, you know the 911 operator, has had nothing to say regarding why 911 called the MOPD instead of animal control to start with. Isn't that curious? Guess 911 didn't know that animal control worked after hours either) The new ordinance stresses that officers still reserve the right to immediately deal with any animal that THEY, the officers, perceive as a threat to them or any other third party that might be present regardless of whether animal control shows up in a timely manner or not. I presume that the term "third party" includes other animals who may be under attack as well, such as livestock etc. (That was not specifically stated, it is an assumption on my part.) Sounds like after reviewing all the evidence, which included all the signed testimonies from all the neighbors involved, not just the ones the majority of the media decided to publish, the town decided on these changes to their ordinances. Obviously, they want Animal Control to play their part in animal control. But even more obviously, they want animal owners to play their part in animal control also, and are showing it by putting some "teeth" into their ordinances. BTW, if the new ordinance had been in place when this all started, some months ago, Durham would have been taken by Animal Control on the third complaint and wouldn't have been in the neighborhood any longer. It appears that from now on in Mount Olive, it's three strikes and you're out.

Check out the the MOTribune when they update their site this week if you need proof. I'm assuming that since you live so far away you don't have access to the printed copy that came out yesterday. Also, ironically, the NewsArgus, who has been just a wealth of information up til recently, didn't print any of news about the updated ordinances of the signed testimonies of the neighbors in yesterday's edition. I guess it is no longer sensational and now that most people, including the town officials, know how this story really played out it won't sell any more papers. It's a fact - good sensible news just doesn't sell. We're thankful that the editor in our hometown paper has a different outlook on publishing.
gotsomesense
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 11:12 pm

Re: Mount Olive police shoot 'vicious' dog - Your opinion?

Postby Former Goldsboro on Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:52 pm

Physical growth has nothing to do with mental maturity, some 12 year olds are the same size as a grown man, but it does not mean thier minds are fully mature, the same goes for dogs. Dogs reach full physical growth within one year, but are still considered puppies and still show characteristics of puppies until 3 years of age. You continue to use tools to prove your point that hold no validity regarding state of mind. Me thinks that thou protest too much. There are some things that are obvious to me, 1) Wiggins wife is afraid of dogs 2) The gossip mill in Mt. O is alive and well 3) You are obvisiously biased regarding this story, as you refuse to believe what anyone else is saying 4) You continue to say we are all entitled to our opinion, yet you scold and berate those who disagree with you, what you really mean is we are entitled to your opinion 5) You are obviously very young, under 30 I would say. And, if you think Raleigh is a long way from Mt. Olive you need a lesson in geography, I am in the area at least once a week if not more. Lastly, you are boring me with uninformed anaylisis and closed minded diatribe. The dog should not have been shot and if an private petition was taken you would see 90% of county agreeing with that statement. As I stated earlier, we will have to agree to disagree, continuing to argue from our view points will not resolve anything, as my mother used to say do not argue with a dolt, people will come to wonder which one is which.
Former Goldsboro
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:41 pm

Re: Mount Olive police shoot 'vicious' dog - Your opinion?

Postby Donna on Thu Oct 02, 2008 2:15 pm

I totally agree with you Former Goldsboro. Seems to me, you are one of the very few that are knowledgeable when it comes to knowing anything at all about dogs. You are correct in your statement about the maturity of a dog.Their bodies sometimes matures before their mind does. Keep up the good work, but remember you are not going to change some peoples minds about the dogs. Makes you wonder, doesn't it? I have worked with dogs all of my adult life, and while everyone is en-titled to their opinion, and I do NOT know everything, I DO feel like I know quite a bit. Attitude has a lot to do with it also, and we all know that in Wayne county, and a lot more counties in North Carolina, many, not all, people do have the attitude that animals don't need humane treatment. I have personally observed it time after time, the attitude is, IT'S JUST A DOG.,which constitutes ignorance to begin with. Further education is needed in this area. As I stated in a previous post, I have no problem with anyone that doesn't like animals, there are some things that I don't like, but if you are not going to be re-sponsible and provide and care for an animal in the proper manner, don't take on the challenge, believe me, it is a tremendous one. I am the owner of a total of twenty, yes twenty, rescued dogs and cats, and believe me I know what it is. They do get the proper care, shots, heartworm treatment, flea treatment, long story short, the whole nine yds. Can prove it to by my vet.
Donna
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:42 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Community Forum



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron